Four major political forces. Three radically different approaches to video. But they all share one thing in common: an unmistakable shift in attention – and investment – toward YouTube.

Why? Because in an election campaign, real-time matters. Analytics matter – and nothing fuels competitive tension (and media FOMO) quite like the feeling that your opponent’s message is outpacing yours in real time.

Here’s how it’s playing out:

The dashboard election

Two numbers tell the story: since the last federal election, the number of political advertisers on YouTube has increased by 40 per cent – but total spend has surged by a staggering 600 per cent.

What’s driven this shift isn’t audience growth alone. In 2022, YouTube reported a reach of 64 per cent of Australians. In 2025, that figure is 77.9 per cent (Source: Google Ads). A notable lift, but not enough to justify such a massive increase in investment.

Meanwhile, linear TV has seen no meaningful decline in reach, and only a modest drop in available audience.

It’s widely accepted that 2022 represented something of a recent peak for linear TV audiences. But based on how political parties are now using YouTube, it’s clear: reach isn’t the reason for the shift.

All video platforms have their strengths – In this election linear TV remains the platform to build upon, but only YouTube offers real-time observation, reporting, and response. In a campaign environment where sentiment can swing in hours, that kind of agility is serious strategic advantage.

Labor vs. Coalition: Analytics arms race

Both major parties have maintained a very strong FTA presence, which as a medium has seen them achieve an increase in audience compared the same period in 2022 – but the real shift has occurred in digital.

Labor leads in total FTA audience, The Coalition leads on subscription television but more significantly they have emerged as YouTube power users.

In 2022, their YouTube presence lagged behind minor parties and behind even Nicolette Boele, the Independent for Bradfield. Today? They're second only to Clive.

The Coalition’s numbers from just the first two weeks tell the story of a dramatic shift in video strategy:

• Already over 1,087 distinct targeting lines (up from 230 in 2022)
• 247 YouTube creatives in use (up from 149 in 2022)
• Tactical seat-by-seat planning and real-time flighting adjustments

This is no longer a TV campaign – it’s a dynamic video strategy borrowed from recent state election successes including in Queensland. Adgile observed the Queensland Liberal party making significant changes to support specific seats throughout the campaign, but especially in the final week when most budget was shifted to support just a couple of swing seats (including Peter Dutton’s electorate of Dickson).

Labor is also harnessing on YouTube’s targeting, with 888 targeting lines and 246 current creatives, but their dollar shift to YouTube is less dramatic and they are buying ~10 per cent fewer impressions than the Coalition.

But what YouTube provides is the ability for the major parties to double down on local issues, as evidenced by their vast array of messaging.  Whilst both parties can cover multiple messages in a single advert, the Coalition has a slight tendency to push a single message per video compared with Labour.

Elsewhere in the video sphere, The Coalition is much more active across multiple BVOD platforms compared with Labor. 

The strategic divide? Labor is still leaning slightly toward FTA. The Coalition is banking heavily on video, and particularly YouTube, as a strategic platform to dial up or down the right message, to the right electorate, at the right time.

Clive Palmer: Blunt force approach

In 2022, Clive’s United Australia Party spend on linear and YouTube outpaced everyone – by a lot. In 2025, with his Trumpet of Patriots party, he’s still making significant noise but after a fast start on linear TV he now trails Labor overall, and just last week was overtaken by the Coalition.

On YouTube, however, he’s still way out in front. In the first two weeks of his 2022 campaign, he bought more impressions than all other major parties combined. Currently, in 2025, he’s ahead of everyone and has bought 25 per cent more impressions than second placed Coalition.

Palmer’s campaign is vast: 215 unique creatives, most with no demographic targeting at all. Only 25 use any form of location filter. Even kids are seeing his ads.

It’s a traditional “blanket coverage” campaign – until you dig deeper.

His YouTube activity is wildly diverse, spanning 15-second ads to 10-minute videos, including repurposed Sky News interviews. Some placements carry CPMs of $1 others $150, hinting at a much broader range of ad types than other parties, and potentially very high bids for very specific interest groups.

So while Palmer may be ignoring demo targeting, it’s likely he’s leveraging YouTube’s behavioural and affinity-based targeting under the hood. And if true he may well be running the most sophisticated creative strategy of the lot.

The Greens: Hyper-targeting on a budget

Of all the major parties, the Greens have made the biggest leap in video sophistication. In 2022, they treated YouTube as a basic reach extension – just 12 different TVC’s and 18 targeting lines – mostly targeting young males.

Fast forward to 2025: they’ve already launched over 350 distinct YouTube creatives, tightly tailored to specific genders, age groups and electorates. Their campaign uses FTA TV as a platform in Adelaide and Perth, but other states see a heavier tilt toward BVOD, SVOD and YouTube. It’s a modern, multi-platform strategy – cost-efficient, data-led and electorally precise.

And it’s affordable. With an average YouTube CPM of just $12 the Greens are clearly leaning heavily on cheaper skippable formats. But what they save on YouTube, they’re investing in premium BVOD and SVOD inventory to ensure their message lands.

This is a sophisticated cross-platform strategy, driven by cost efficiency and targeting precision. But it's also reliant on two elements that often do better in pitch decks than in practice: accurate geolocation and frequency control.

Analytics trumps geo flaws?

What unites these political party strategies – whether tightly targeted or blunt-force – is a hunger for visibility.

Elections are live, reactive and every party is watching their opponents like a hawk. A spike in impressions or a sudden surge in a key seat? That intel flows into the political war-room and drives an immediate action.

This is where YouTube wins. Not because it’s cheaper or younger. But because it offers feedback in real-time – in elections, that’s gold.

Of course, none of this works if the data is flawed. YouTube’s Achilles heel may be location accuracy: outside capital cities, IP-based geo-targeting can be as low as 50 per cent accurate. (According to DNS Checker, my Brisbane CBD office currently thinks it's in Tasmania.)

Marketer take-outs

This election offers a crystal-clear signal for marketers: real-time video analytics aren’t a nice-to-have.

When political parties – arguably the most agile, outcome-obsessed advertisers in the world – shift their budgets so dramatically, it sends a message: real-time visibility and control matter more than ever.

The implications stretch far beyond politics. Marketers are watching, agencies are adapting and media dollars are flowing to platforms that deliver performance, accountability, and the ability to optimise in real time.

At present, though, there’s a tangible trade-off. YouTube’s strength lies in its performance orientation, flexible formats, and real-time optimisation. Yet it remains a black box – with opaque placement controls, inconsistent geo-targeting, and limited transparency around context and environment.

By contrast, premium video environments like FTA, BVOD, and SVOD offer guaranteed quality, brand-safe delivery, and full transparency – especially when paired with independent analytics.

The lesson from this election isn’t that one platform has won. It’s that marketers need both: the speed and flexibility of YouTube, and the trust and quality of premium environments. And they need measurement that works across all of it.

This story is part of Mi3’s full collection of industry trends, debate and developments from Future of TV Advertising ’25 editorial series here.